> In 1970's, the number of people who dealt with programming was significantly smaller than today. It's a matter of fact. And people who worked with computers b

> In 1970's, the number of people who dealt with programming was significantly smaller than today. It's a matter of fact. And people who worked with computers back then were highly educated and pioneers of the technology, there was no room for half-hearted effort or "let's copy the first result from stackoverflow.com". And yet probably the same percentage of what they wrote was utter crap [0]. The illusion comes from having more people writing more code for more reasons now. Sturgeon's law still applies. On top of that, the industry rewards those who: * "Produce results" insetad of those who pre-empted a bug 5 years in advance by building something to be robust [1]. * Job hop every year or two, and thereby disproportionately rewarding those who work on their CV. * Are personal friends and family of higher ups [2]. To claim the major reason why software is in its current state is largely/solely because of all the "farmers" is harmful ignorance, at best. > programmers who are meticulous, detail-oriented and who genuinely recognize the problem first are in minority Perhaps the biggest problems in(/with) technology today aren't of a technical nature. If even somewhat true, then those who are "meticulously and genuinely recognizing the problems" aren't necessarily even programmers. [0]: This is hard/impossible to know one way or the other due to survivorship bias. A lot of software from the 70s is just gone. [1]: Instances of this are hard to even find, naturally. Squeaky wheel gets the grease and all that. [2]: Hardly exclusive to IT, but still a significant factor.